The NRA has filed suit against Cuomo and the head of New York’s Department of Financial Services, Maria Vullo. I was hoping NRA was working on this, because the lawsuit practically writes itself. The 33 page complaint can be found here. The suit is not just against Cuomo and Vullo in their official capacity, but also against them as individuals. This means Cuomo and Vullo will be personally on the hook for part of NRA’s losses, and NRA is claiming that it “…Â has suffered tens of millions of dollars in damages based on Defendantsâ€™ conduct …”
Defendantsâ€™ unlawful exhortations to New York insurance companies, banks, and financial institutions that they, among other things, â€œmanag[e] their risks, including reputational risks, that may arise from their dealings with the NRA . . ., as well as continued assessment of compliance with their own codes of social responsibility[,]â€ as well as â€œreview any relationships they have with the NRA[,]â€ and â€œtake prompt actions to managing these risks and promote public health and safety[,]â€ constitute a concerted effort to deprive the NRA of its freedom of speech by threatening with government prosecution services critical to the survival of the NRA and its ability to disseminate its message. Defendantsâ€™ actions constitute an â€œimplied threat[ ] to employ coercive state powerâ€ against entities doing business with the NRA, and they are reasonably interpreted as such.
There’s several things claimed in this complaint that are important. One is that even if DFS was correct in fining Lockton and Chubb, it was wholly inappropriate and beyond the scope of their lawful authority to demand that both companies cease doing business at all with NRA, even outside of New York, even for programs which are compliant with New York Law. When I first read that, my thought was “That’s pretty much slam dunk a First Amendment violation.”
Secondly, NRA argues that the fine was meant as retaliation for NRA’s exercise of its First Amendment rights, because other organizations similarly situated to NRA are apparently violating New York’s claimed regulation and have not faced prosecution. NRA claims Lockton and Chubb were singled out specifically for NRA’s views which Cuomo and Vullo find abhorrent.
Federal judges will still be federal judges, and gun rights and NRA are not popular among that set, especially in New York City. But this is a First Amendment case, and the precedent is much more clear that Cuomo and Vullo are violating NRA’s rights, and as a consequence, our rights as members. I do hope if and when this hits discovery, if other conspirators are found, they are added to the suit.
They wanted to make an example out of us. Now we can turn this around and make an example of them.
18 thoughts on “Punching Back Twice as Hard”
Doesnâ€™t matter. The courts will side with the Cuomo and New York. Itâ€™s pre-ordained because guns and NRA. Hell, they could have put out warrants for the arrest of NRA leadership over this. Not only that but could have a media event where they say they will hunt down and arrest NRA members and when they send them to New York City publicly execute them with antitank rifleâ€™s without trial ala North Korea and the courts would say nothing wrong was done. I could just imagine the orgasm MSNBC and CNN and over half the Democratic Party would have. After all to them the only good gun owner or enter a member is a dead one. And if they have to kill over 100 million citizens to do it they will do it. And the courts would still side with the government. The Courts hate us. It does not matter how salad a case the NRA might have as long as the judge feels that all gun owners should be sent to extermination camps. I have said before That when it comes to Judges involving anything with guns you might as well be a Jew facing Roland Freisler. And the only reason that they donâ€™t have you hanged is they donâ€™t have that kind of power. Yet.
I don’t ever want to hear you accuse me of being a downer again. Seriously, dude. This is fucking nuts.
Hey do you think the NRA is going to win? Because I sure donâ€™t. No chance in hell. I have no faith in the courts. If the case involves guns the court will side with the government one hundred percent of the time, no exceptions. No matter how cut and dry. That ban in Illinois? Upheld. That ban in Boulder Colorado? Upheld. Banning people in Florida under 21 from buying rifles? Upheld. Even if it goes all the way to the Supreme Court which wonâ€™t hear it anyway.
I always use extreme examples because I know and you know realistically they will never happen. Maybe. As for being me being a downer I am when it involves the courts.
Based on establish precedent, they have a pretty good shot. Much better than it would be if this were a 2nd Amendment suit.
So what do you think the percentage that the NRA wins? I have it at a solid 0%. If there is such precident how confident are you that it (the precident) wonâ€™t be thrown in the garbage by the because of the parties involved and subject matter?
Expect the worst, hope for the best. A good strategy for avoiding disapppointment in life. But Iâ€™d say odds are > 0. Youâ€™re giving me a lot of leeway by claiming â€œa solid 0%â€
I’d say better than even chance they’ll win. I’d give it 60%
If it weren’t the NRA, I’d say it would be a slam dunk. Because ZOMG GUNZ! I would give it about 80%. I doubt the NRA would bring suit if they weren’t pretty sure they had a good chance of winning.
(In short, I pretty much agree with Sebastian here)
Its 0% if you don’t try. I don’t care if its only .5%. They should try. Yes the courts hate us and fail to do their jobs often. But that doesn’t mean they will fail every time. And Trump has been busy appointing good judges to courts. The tide will turn.
Don’t overlook the Kolbe Case from Maryland and our loss in the 4th circuit court and subsequent denial for review from the Supreme Court. https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/02/fourth-circuit-decision-maryland-assault-weapons-ban-constitutional-travesty/?sf58166763=1 You’re not a “downer” rather a REALIST, as far as winning in the Courts are concerned,,, we’re finished.
If this were a 2nd Amendment case, I’d agree with you. But it’s a 1st Amendment case, where the precedent is much more established.
I think someone needs to be on suicide watch. I can understand being a bit pessimistic, but this is depression to the point of psychosis.
Seriously, bro, get some help. I am not being snarky, I am quite serious. This is what I did for a living.
What we need is a criminal prosecution for denial of civil rights under color of law. If only the DoJ was awake.
The left is very good at lawfare We are just learning Myself I am skeptical that NRA will succeed either. That is why the Trump, McConnell campaign of appointing as many judges as possible is so important
It’s funny how the same NRA who wanted the Heller case to quietly die and go away will come out guns blazing when the issue involves one of their revenue streams.
There was no precedent that would indicate Heller would win at the time of that case. It was a much bigger gamble with our rights on the line. Caution is well advised when taking on a case like that.
Probably the coffee talking, but when I saw thus the other day I couldn’t help but say “YISS!!!!”
At least NRA had the good sense to file its suit in the Northern District of New York (chambers in Albany, Binghamton, Utica and Syracuse), not the Southern District (Manhattan, White Plains) or the Eastern District (Brooklyn, Long Island). Western District (Buffalo, Rochester) might have been another choice, but hey, the state capital’s in Albany, gotta sue Gov. Cuomo where he lives, right?
The Southern District gave us Kachalsky and other monuments to the constitutional principle that NYC is different and special and there’s no Second Amendment there. The Northern District gave us the visiting judge (Senior Judge Scullin) on the District Court for the District of Columbia who gave us closer-to-sane rulings in Palmer.
Comments are closed.